So Joe's received some poor customer service? Encountered some people who aren't doing their job to the standard he expects? Gotten a bit grumpy in the long queues?

Once again, disability rears its head in social media and invokes what I like to call The Two Hand rule. On the one hand, disability is something Real. It's experienced by real people and treated seriously by people who don't directly experience it. Everyone probably has at least a passing acquaintance with someone who has a disability. After all, we make up about 20 per cent of the Australian population, whether you have the type that's visible to the naked eye or not. And in sage conversations, we all like to murmur amongst each other and agree that, yes, people living with disabilities deserve to be respected because that's what a benevolent society does - it treats everyone with respect.

And on the other hand, we have the Not Real kind of disability. The one you can use to make cheap jokes to score cheaper points. It's this kind of Not Real disability that presumably led Hildebrand to compare, for the benefit of his almost 15,000 strong twitter followers, workplace incompetence to intellectual disability.

Look, I empathise with the guy, I really do. I find being at airports stressful too. Although I'm generally more worried about whether my wheelchair will get broken in the cargo hold, whether it will end up on the same plane as me, the fact that I haven't had a coffee or even a sip of water that morning because I can't get to the toilet on a plane and where on earth I might find wheelchair repair people if my chair is, in fact, not operational when I finally get it back. But I totally get it - customer service that isn't quite to your liking can be very, very bad.

And the man was just making a joke, right? Why does the PC Brigade have to ruin everything?

Like the countless people who make thoughtless jokes about disability, I don't think Joe Hildebrand was conscious of the ableism inherent in his silly joke. But it was there. And the thing with speaking from a position of privilege is that you're not often asked to think about how your language affects other people - and when you are, it seems everyone jumps up and down complaining about how the system is oppressing their freedom of speech, with little thought for those whom the speech routinely oppresses.

Much like the LGBT community has to deal with people (okay, mostly teenagers - the rest of us have finally cottoned on that it's more than a little bit homophobic) referring to things that are a bit shit as 'so gay' in our post-ironic society. I find it hard to imagine Hildebrand referring to the staff at Sydney Airport as 'so gay' - so why is it still okay for disability to be treated as synonymous with subpar performance?

Hildebrand's tweet is offensive because it uses disability as a shortcut to mean "crap". And in doing so, he reveals a subtle and no doubt unconscious contempt for disabled people that is still rife in our culture. At best, it displays a blatant ignorance of the very real barriers faced by people with disability, some of which, ironically, are employment and air travel. At its worst, it assumes that jokes like these are okay - because they're not about anyone important. Perhaps it's assumed that people with intellectual disabilities won't 'get it' anyway. That they can't be hurt by a joke they don't understand.

Let me assure you, intellectual disability does not preclude you from being aware that you're being made fun of. It doesn't stop that kind of bullying from being hurtful. And sadly, this kind of ridicule is all too familiar for people with intellectual disabilities. It doesn't stop when they leave the schoolyard because, unfortunately, they continue to cop it from their adult peers for the rest of their lives.

But even if those who are the butt of these jokes didn't understand them, is that really the kind of society we want to be? One that turns a blind eye to cruel, exploitative humour at the expense of vulnerable people who can't fight - or tweet - back?

Joe Hildebrand is a professional journalist and a high profile media commentator. By engaging in this kind of behaviour, he reinforces the idea that these kinds of base, schoolyard taunts are acceptable. Disability is not a cute little joke. And as a white, middle-class, non-disabled man, it is certainly not Joe Hildebrand's cute little joke.

People will no doubt defend it as harmless, as humour of this kind always is. They'll dismiss any criticism as the kind of kneejerk, uptight reaction you expect from the Fun Police. But humour can only be harmless if by definition it causes no harm. This doesn't fit that bill.

I'm prepared to accept that Hildebrand didn't intend to lampoon the disability community. But as someone who's spent a lifetime on the receiving end of this kind of 'harmless' humour, I feel I've earned the necessary credentials to determine whether someone is being clever, or simply using us as the convenient punchline to a poorly thought out joke. In Hildebrand's case, I'm afraid, it was the latter.

Update: Joe Hildebrand has responded to this article via Twitter:

"Just want to say how sorry I am for using the words "mentally handicapped" in a tweet. That was really retarded of me."

"Just want to say I'm sorry for offending so many people by using the word "retarded" in a tweet. That was really Irish of me."

"Sorry I just offended so many people by using the term "Irish". Just having a blonde moment."

Share

Comments (59)

CJJenkins :

Lindsay Cottee :

20 Mar 2012 10:58:46am

i may be the only disabled person(i have spastic quad cp) with this view but i think jo'sjoke provide's agood opportunity. rather than attacking the guy for his lack of knowledge would it not be better to correct him and say actully jo there are very few mentally disabled people working at sydney airport but in a constant effort to improve service we are launching a program to employ more.

Simmo :

07 Mar 2012 11:09:31am

According to Joe Hildebrand, Achieve Australia (an org whose vision is to "achieve social inclusion") support his comments. He says so here http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/exclusive-george-negus-isnt-satan/story-e6frezz0-1226287756323

Isn't the fact that there are a few people with intellectual disabilities working at airports completely beside the point?

StBob :

06 Mar 2012 12:11:37pm

I just found this, a comment on Bob Carr's blog Thoughtlines http://bobcarrblog.wordpress.com/2011/12/19/lunch-with-the-australian-financial-review/In which he likens the US Republican Presidential candidates' debate to "some sort of psychodrama staged in a group home for the developmentally disabled".Cheap shot Bob and no better than the comment by Joe Hildebrand by someone who should know much, much better.

kathryn :

26 Feb 2012 6:44:02am

funny, joe doesnt like anti-semitic jokes, has written very passionate articles about it, bet if someone tweeted one of those type of jokes in relation to customer service at the airport he understandably wouldn't find that funny, nor would I. Shame his understanding of racism and its negative impact doesnt extend to an understanding of the negative impact of ableism, here's some light reading for you joe, leave the r word out of it http://www.r-word.org/Default.aspx and try harder to find something actually funny to say, its very dull when the only humour you can find is at the expense of a group that has been marginalised, like I said you of all people should know what thats like. Then again there has been no learning at all since this tweet evidenced by your all time low of tours of aboriginal communities, showing you have nothing at all to say· .

Jake Joehl :

13 Feb 2012 11:01:52am

Excellent article Stella! As for Mr. Hildebrand, I think he could use a bit of quiet time. Perhaps a good reprimand from his superiors? I am blind and, while I don't find phrases such as 'turn a deaf ear', or a 'blind eye' offensive, I do take offense to what was said in Mr. Hildebrand's tweets--especially his second tweet. There's actually a website I'd like him and others to check out: http://www.thesocialchallenge.org . On that site anyone who tweets the R-word will get back a gentle reminder of how hurtful that word is. And no I'm not talking about "respect" or any of those nice words. I was guilty of using this word at one time too.

BH :

13 Feb 2012 8:27:51am

Stella,

I just want to say thank you. Your articles and tweets give me hope. Thank you for demanding that ableism be acknowledged. Thank you for highlighting how it is reproduced in public discourse – Yes! Hildebrand’s comments are an example of society’s profound contradictory discourses about dis⁄ability.

Australia has a very long way to go before ableism (the production of ableness and pre-occupation with normality, beauty and perfection) and disablism (socially imposed restrictions of activity on people with impairments and the undermining of their psychoemotional wellbeing) are taken seriously.

Linda :

Michael :

25 Feb 2012 8:02:59pm

I would like to put my foot in the door first all speak up to every child with the Disabilities. I do think to my understanding the parents carers give them a good education bloost up their independent living skills getting ready to move out from their family home into supportive accommodiaton

Roger Thomas :

12 Feb 2012 3:31:54am

Take a look at his facebook page where he ridicules the blind: http://www.facebook.com/joe.hildebrand

Good article Stella. It's a pity, judging from a number of comments to your article as well as Hildebrands own words, that there continues to be a great deficit in the publics ability to empathise with others and reason morally.

pbfromippy :

11 Feb 2012 3:05:30pm

The ongoing validation of any derogatory language, for example oxymorons like ethical journalist for example, provide negative images of people who would choose to experience similar life experiences as the rest of society if they were so allowed. However given the negative connotation of such references using the language of this honest journalist, sorry another oxymoron that is offensive, then the quest for equality continues. Perhaps the search for a non-offensive considerate journalist is as easy a quest as access and inclusion for people with disability in a society propped up by the ignorance of pricks like this piece of garbage. Have a nice day.

Edward :

I'd forgive the first tweet as a minor issue and a blow up as a result of frustration.

For the follow up tweets I'd fire the journalist and certainly wouldn't have him on any program which calls for him to express a balanced or objective view.

I question Stella's use of the term "professional" as these tweets show a clear lack of professionalism and any well regarded profession would require such actions to be defended at a professionalism and standards board.

I have problems with Stella's attempt to be the gate keeper for all that's right and proper for people with disabilities. She has herself fallen into the pitfalls of double standards by allowing such terms as "vision impaired freddy" to be included in articles published on this site. Given this article and the article she published on footware and dress requirements for wheel chair users I feel that there is a lack of consistency in her application of standards.

Angela Moore :

10 Feb 2012 12:38:07pm

... to think that I had thought that Joe Hildebrand was 'good journalist', when clearly he wouldn't see it as such a joke if he had the experience for a day ... Like Abbott and lothers he wouldn't be able to handle it at all.

Kapersky :

10 Feb 2012 11:59:45am

I dunno about all this. Surely what JH said in a tweet to the public is bad and his follow-ups were worse. He showed he was genuinely being an asshole.

But as an aside, specifically the words 'retard' and 'gay' can and have taken on a new meaning. If I say 'that's gay' I am not comparing whatever 'that' is to homosexuality (and it's apparent inherit badness). It is used to mean 'less than ideal', but in it's own right, not as compared to homosexuality.

I know you will all say 'south park is terrible and offensive' but there is a great episode where the boys try to drive all the 'fags' out of town. Everyone kicks up a stink until they realise that the term 'fags' is not referring to homosexuals at all, but in fact to Harley Davidson riders who rev their engines all the time. In the end they change the definition of the word in the dictionary.

There is no intent to compare motorcycle riders to homosexuals, but there is 2 completely independent definitions of the word.

Fag (noun):1. Derogative term used to refer to homosexuals.2. Derogative term used to refer to Harley riders.

Only someone who was unaware of the second meaning would assume that it is offensive to homosexuals.

Sam Connor :

10 Feb 2012 10:24:16am

Dear Joe

You missed the point.

Its not about the words, although they hurt, too. There are a million school kids out there using the word 'retard'. We probably don't even care a great deal that you've ranked yourself amongst the millions. After all, you're a News Ltd journalist. We don't expect a lot more.

What we DO object to is what you MEANT. Because most people with intellectual disability in the workplace are punctual, hardworking employees. With great customer service and an awesome work ethic. THAT is what we object to, not just your use of offensive and vilifying and outdated vernacular.

If the concept expressed in this post and in Stella's article is too sophisticated for you to understand, there is a great organisation called 'Scope' who translate big words into easy concepts for people who have learning difficulties. I'm sure if you rang them and up and told them who you are, they'd be happy to help you out.

David :

09 Feb 2012 9:05:32pm

I am convinced that many abled bods consider themselves some how special and invincible. As many of us know disability knows no social class or socio economic divide and can strike anyone including loved ones, at any time. None of us as humans can be too smug! Hopefully, Joe doesn't have to learn the hard way and just reflects on how hurtful and damaging his remarks were to people with intellectual impairments.

The Village Idiot (Reformed) :

10 Feb 2012 9:23:45am

So am I correct from this article and your reply to same, that mentally challenged people have the same abilities as non-mentally challenged people. That is, they are entitled to the same rights, without the same responsibilities. If a person is incapable of performing their jib, they are still entitled to it in this brave new world of socialist PC we now live under ???

Fiona :

13 Mar 2012 5:32:16pm

Are you implying that it is wrong for a person with a disability to have the same rights as people who do not have a disability?

In regards to employment, people with disabilities all over Australia are contributing in the work force. People with physical, intellectual and mental health disabilities continue to participate productively in workplaces all over Australia.

There are many ways that all people can contribute. Whether it be paid employment, paid employment under the supported wage system or volunteer work.

Mark Pattison :

09 Feb 2012 5:59:25pm

Thanks Stella for a great response, well written and thoughtful unlike the original. I have just assisted 2 women with intellectual disability present a session at the Having a Say Conference in Geelong (the largest conference for people with disabiltiy in Australia) on bullying. The name calling experinced by many of the participants caused obvious pain and distress. One of the main points that people made is that the pain lasts for years. The participants called for strong vilification laws or hate crime legislation similar to the that in the UK. Many thanks again. mark

Stefanitza :

Achybones :

09 Feb 2012 5:10:02pm

Way to go, Stella! Your article is one of the most well-written and articulate I've read in a long time.

Several years ago I fell victim to a creeping condition that has vastly affected my life. About 18 months ago I reluctantly accepted the inevitable and applied for the disability pension. Omigod - I was officially 'disabled'. I was one of 'those' people!

And boy, has my predicament made me more aware of the myriad ways we insult people with physical or intellectual conditions. (I'm as guilty as anyone else, having recently used the term "retarded" to describe something which was just plain silly.)

Stella, I hope you keep on sticking up for others with disabilities. Your body may be a bit creaky, but your intellect is razor-sharp!

extropian1 :

09 Feb 2012 4:05:49pm

It appears not only does JH welcome some publicity at the expense of others' disbilities with the concomitant embarassment.With the sensitiviyu of a cactus plant, he opines that being a smart-arse about it will disarm the complainants.[apologies to smart-arses and cacti]

cry6wotcry6 :

Craig Wallace :

09 Feb 2012 3:05:36pm

This is a great article but I am less generous to Mr Hildebrand than Stella. He is clearly inviting people to conclude that handicapped equals crap and moreover that employing people with a ‘mental handicap’ means that the service would be crap. And the follow-up says he means it and isn't sorry at all.

This is outrageous coming from a News Limited clone given that they go around slyly portraying people with disabilities as supplicants and obese/drug addled/unemployed welfare rorters who should 'get back to work' (even though many of us are already working, volunteering and making other contributions).

These people slam us when we don't work and mock us when we do.

And for the record Joe Hildebrand the people with an intellectual disability I know in jobs are honest, hardworking and dependable.

Yolanda :

09 Feb 2012 2:46:25pm

What a great article. You are a fantastic writer Stella. I agree totally with what you have said and find Joe Hildebrand's 'apologies' really disgusting. There are so many people in the media who are so thoughtless and nasty with their blithe generalising and criticising of all kinds of difference. It is also intellectually lazy. Couldn't Joe have said something about poor service without comparing staff to people who have a problem? And what's to say that people with some kind of intellectual disability would not have the capacity to be brilliant at customer service? I hope Joe is never invited back to Q & A. And you are invited on in his place.

Nick C :

For me, Joe crosses a line regardless, but you say JH is 'non-disabled') and that therefore it's not his 'cute little joke') .

I accept that he appears not to (have a disability) and that makes his comments appear even more insensitive, but unless he has specifically said 'i don't have a disability' I'm not going to assume he hasn't.

Gazza :

donna :

08 Feb 2012 10:48:45pm

Working in the airline industry, the comment pushes my buttons because generally able bodied passengers treat the industry as if they we getting a private limousine, not quick, effective, public transport. As the mother of a school aged child with Down Syndrome, I want you to come to my school and advocate for him. Can I use your words when they next say, kids like .that... or downs kids...the list goes on. My son at 9 with an intellectual impairment can work out clearly,who is being kind and who is making fun of him. very fast and he also has a sense of humour something that was lacking in that tweet

Adam :

08 Feb 2012 6:48:56pm

You're reading into things too much.

Most things could be construed as offensive to someone, somewhere. Most especially humour - I'd almost say no humour can be entirely victimless if you question it from all sorts of angles. Are homeless people offended by knock-knock jokes? Blonde jokes are obviously out. Bonus points to those who can find a chicken crossing the road a bit off.

Margaret T :

09 Feb 2012 11:56:16am

Adam, judging from your name, you'd have to be a white Anglo-Saxon male - so you would think that. Some WASMs do show empathy, but you are obviously not one of them.

If it's not good enough for "blond" jokes, it's not good enough to use "retard" or otherwise use language offensive to people with a disability - in Joe Hildebrand's case using disability as a substitute for negative service, behaviour.

Mallick :

09 Feb 2012 2:42:34pm

As the author pointed out she was bound to get your kind of thoughtless response. The fact is words hurt. The fact is that people who get hurt can also be suffering from a range of other hurtful experiences and words and just one more can have a hugely negative affects on people's self esteem and sense of self worth. Think again about the issue. It is serious.

Declan Stylofone :

09 Feb 2012 6:53:02pm

But Adam there are things that are beyond the pale. Jokes about jews and the holocaust, aborigines, the word "nigger"... all of these are deemed to be unacceptable. Or are they OK just because you think it's OK to be offensive?

You should go down to the holocaust museum and tell some of the survivors they should lighten up about your jewish jokes, it's in the same category.

We have freedom of speech in this country so you all have a right to prove you are either ignorant or malevolent. But don't expect us to approve of your personal shortcomings just because you are allowed to disgrace yourself.

Adam :

So you take personally when someone who doesn't know you uses a word that reminds you a negative experience from your past?

That's your own mind holding you down, not the oblivious stranger.

Fact is, Mallick, words only hurt if you let them.

Even despite my terminal Anglo-Saxon male condition, I am empathetic. I used to cop it and let it affect me even to the point where some of you seem to be at where you assume its all negative even if not about or directed toward you. I got over feeling that shit and stopped letting it bother me; unless it was from someone whose opinion mattered to me then its just noise. Once you stop looking for it and take it as it is intended you'll be happier. Or you'll whinge that no one's paying attention to you anymore.

Sam Connor :

10 Feb 2012 10:38:09am

'Fact is, words only hurt if you let them'.

How true, Adam. But as you, like me, come from an Anglo Saxon background - I don't know if you have a disability that would cause you to be discriminated against or not - we don't have a great deal of *experience* in the sticks and stones area, really. Most people don't go around slinging racist comments at people who are not in a minority group, just as they do not go round slinging comments at people who are not visibly disabled.

Its to do with the *frequency* and the hurtfulness and the same, same, same every day kind of discrimination that really burns.

Imagine this.

You couldn't access the same pub your work colleagues go to every Friday afternoon and you have to think about it every Friday.You can't access public transport so you have to pay more for a taxi.You're an Aboriginal person which means that you can never, ever get a taxi at three am, nor a job, because people make negative assumptions about you.Kids in the playground make comments that refer to your intellectual disability every day - its retarded, people are morons or idiots or halfwits. You hear it all the time, in the background of your life. You are deliberately excluded from groups of people because you are 'weird' or 'odd', because you have autism. You have heard this all your life and you're treated differently, although you have nothing physical people can see, and you don't know how to fix it. You're one of the 95% or so of deaf people who come from a hearing family and you can't even communicate in your own home, so you feel cut off. Some fool from NewsLtd compares your work ethic with the terrible work ethic he's experienced at Sydney Airport.

If you're lucky enough to not let it bother you, more power to you. But it does NOT make it okay, ever.

Crazy Joe Divola :

Adrian :

Sam you are right in the fact of what your saying we should not label persons as retards, spastics and the list go's on.

But unfortunalty it do's occur and should we get all heated under the collar because of someones arrogant mouth.

In most cases it do's not pay too on the spot but help educate those persons with a similar mindset, through the media.

i for one am not mentally disabled but because i broke my neck i am labeled at times as such, by the ablied.

In the public area making a scene of the situation can bring more discredited to the name of persons with any form of disability than through the proper channels of education especially schoolls where the break down off stigma will greatly influeanced.

Ben Crothers :

24 Feb 2012 8:44:52am

The issue is not the words Hildebrand uses, but the values and attitudes that underpin the words he uses. Hildebrand's values on this issue have no place in contemporary Australian society, and even less place in the Australian media.

Angry Cripple Editor :

pinguprue :

08 Feb 2012 3:09:44pm

I know I should be offended by his comment and after reading your article Stel, I am offended. But sometimes at first instance I forget that things like this are offensive. I actually get my back up more with the whole "that's so gay" remarks than the disability ones.

Lesley Hall :

Stella Young :

08 Feb 2012 3:55:56pm

Hi Lesley,

Thanks for this comment. I genuinely hadn't considered that using the term "blind eye" would be offensive, as I think of it as part of everyday speech, and not a comment on the value of people who are blind or vision impaired.

One of the points I was trying to make in this piece is that, in my opinion, the language we use is important, but it's secondary to our intention. I certainly didn't intend to be offensive, but this will certainly make me think about using this term in future. I'd be really interested to know if it's a term that people who are blind or vision impaired broadly consider inappropriate.

Thanks again for pointing this out - it's always good to be called on your privilege. :)

Andrew Devenish-Meares :

08 Feb 2012 4:30:07pm

I don't think it's offensive, and Guide Dogs NSW/ACT used it in their campaign "Don't Turn a Blind Eye".

That having been said, I can understand the argument that it continues to promote the idea that if you can't see you're unaware. In my opinion that's the biggest misunderstanding sighted people have about the vision impaired.

Mind you, most VIPs I know happily use words like "look" and "see" every day, so if we're dropping "turn a blind eye" we might need to use "perceive" instead.

Lesley hall :

Declan Stylofone :

09 Feb 2012 6:09:07pm

I'm about to put in more than 2 cents worth, but here goes...

I think it would be interesting to hear from someone who is blind, especially if they have researched this. Our language abounds with metaphors relating to vision, but they are not necessarily pejorative. You say "I see" when you mean "I understand". A bespectacled person would know that the figurative use of the term "short-sighted" is not relevant to their condition.

I note that the Vision Australia Website advises: 'Use words like "look" and "see"; they are part of everyone's vocabulary. Otherwise both you and the person who is vision impaired will feel awkward.' http://www.visionaustralia.org.au/info.aspx?page=1510

One striking thing about Ramp Up is the high quality of the comments: the insight, the camaraderie and the respect people show each other here. I love that, and I think Lesley Hall spoke in that spirit. So let none of the linguistic gorillas on the other side of this argument think that we are fighting among ourselves and being torn apart by political correctness. It's all cool. We like talking about this stuff, it's really easy not to be a total dick.

I've just spent a week doing battle with the NSW Assisted Transport office to get a driver for my son, and that has made me more aware of the solidarity I referred to.

I also had a recent online argument in another forum with a person who insisted that I had no right to object to his use of the word "retard". He wouldn't even make an exception for me personally after I told him how it was a family affair, that it's actually my son we are referring to here (my son is also vision impaired, by the way) .

Make no mistake, we are dealing with people who insist on using words to cause personal pain and insult. It is verging on hate speech, and that is a very different matter to having a civilised discussion about language.

mworkman :

10 Feb 2012 7:56:26am

I'm going to adjust the reply slightly to show why it's problematic."Thanks for this comment. I genuinely hadn't considered that using the term "retarded" would be offensive, as I think of it as part of everyday speech, and not a comment on the value of people who are cognitively disabled."Doesn't seem acceptable to me when put this way. Nor do I think that not intending to cause offence entirely excuses the action, though there is obviously something more acceptable about unintentionally causing harm versus intentionally doing so. Lastly, whether a majority of blind people find it offensive doesn't seem relevant either. If a majority of people with cognitive disabilities weren't offended by the term "retard", it wouldn't necessarily make it an acceptable term.When you mean foolish, ignorant, stupid, unthinking, etc, I think it's better to use these words instead of blind or variations like "blind eye".

mworkman :

10 Feb 2012 8:12:12am

I'm not sure it follows that we should also abandon words like "look' and "see". What I advocate is trying to separate negative connotations from words that certain groups of people also identify with. It's fine to call something stupid because there is no National Organization of Stupid Americans. No one identifies with this term. However, there is an Alliance for Equality of Blind Canadians, and I identify as blind. Not surprisingly, I would prefer it if the term that describes me not also be synonymous with stupid, unthinking, foolish, ignorant, etc, and I do not believe it is mere coincidence that blind is synonymous with these terms. Wanting this change does not also imply that any term relating to visual perception is unacceptable. That said, I think a conversation about the origins and implications of the dominant role sight metaphors play in our language is worth having.

Sam Connor :

10 Feb 2012 10:52:18am

You could also argue that using the words 'moron, stupid, cretin, fool, idiot, feebleminded, halfwit' in our day to day vernacular is vilification. Ever used those words? Sure. Everyone does. Look at where those words came from. We're talking about people with intellectual disability. The words have crept into common use, and nobody blinks when you say them. Ditto phrases like 'turning a blind eye' or a 'deaf ear'. Language changes all the time...look at the Yanks. Five years ago using the word 'retarded' was commonplace, now its a wash-your-mouth-out-with-soap offence.

Its worth looking at the discussions about the 'n' word in America, too. Its okay, apparently, if you're a black African American, to use the 'n' word because its 'reclaiming your power' and 'turning it around' and about 'identity'. In Australia, there are very few indigenous Australians who would use the words 'boong' or 'coon' (I even dislike typing them, it feels more offensive to me than using the 'c' word). Stella would be the first to agree that many people with disability think the same way about the term 'crip' and 'cripple'. What's okay, what's not okay? Cos there has to be a line somewhere.

There's a whole other argument about using words if you're part of 'that cohort'. I'm offended by the word 'crip' and 'cripple', but most of the people I know who have physical disability use it and I respect their right to do so. I'd probably do the same if it was a person with another type of disability. I know lots of blind froods who use the term 'blinkies' and deaf people who say 'deafies' and autistic people who say 'Aspies' or 'auties' - wouldn't worry me either. Language changes, people's perspectives change.

Declan Stylofone :

10 Feb 2012 1:11:18pm

When you think about it, the idea conjured by by the term "turn a blind eye" is that of a person who has lost the sight in one eye, and wilfully positions themselves in a way that would stop them from seeing something they'd rather not know about. The inference that I personally take is that it's not necessarily pejorative, although it wouldn't feel right to use those terms on one of the many occasions when I visit Vision Australia or RIDBC!

But I find it less troublesome than, for example, some of the words of Jesus, who decried the Pharisees as "Ye fools and blind", just one of many many such negative metaphorical references in the bible. I'm not trying to make a religious point here, just illustrate that this kind of language is deeply ingrained.

The pejorative term "retard", by contrast, is a modern construction. There is a kind of treadmill of pejoration where medical or official terms start out with the intention of being accurate or neutral or scholarly, but they are then adopted by people to use as insults. The people who wish to use respectful language then have to find a new word because the old ones have been taken over.

Of necessity I speak as an advocate here, rather than a person with the disability in question. My teenage son has lost the use of one eye due to detached retina. He also has an intellectual disability. As far as protecting his dignity is concerned, I don't have much problem with "turn a blind eye", But I most certainly do NOT like "retard".

SpecialK :

14 Feb 2012 1:47:43pm

@THE VILLAGE IDIOT (REFORMED)

So.. you obviously missed the last 300 years of human philosophical development right? You know, the Enlightenment...Universal Declaration of Human Rights? Foundation of the Modern European Welfare States? Since when has productivity had anything to do with equal rights? Gosh you're funny! I know - throw us all out to the wolves I suppose (dingoes rather). If this society was actually based on productivity or worth there would be a heck of a lot of people being eaten before us :P

I also wanted to raise the point that I saw earlier where a couple of people were discussing that maybe Joe H could have had a disability that we might not have known about - like that could have then made it OK. Well it doesn't. Someone with a disability making those sort of comments would be EQUALLY as offensive as Mr Hildebrand. Our own disability does not give us free reign to hurt the feelings of others because again - we cannot control how others will feel from the words we use, ESPECIALLY when they are such loaded words and traditionally such derogatory words.

Let's not get mixed up. Using terms like "crip" among friends is totally different. To refer to yourself or among friends you clearly have an accepted meaning and intention of the word in a controlled environment. I don't like it personally (same as the "n" word in African-American culture. I always think it gives another chance for the ruling class to ridicule us more "look at those pathetic idiots trying to be cool - they're using our insults hahahaha!"), but if it empowers individuals and it is used among consenting adults then more power - (even then it's a grey area for me). But it's not OK to insult people's disability just because you have a disability!

I hope the ABC takes note and NEVER allows Joe Hildebrand on Q&A again.

VIVETERAN :

16 Feb 2012 9:57:13pm

Yes Declan I agree totally - I have lived with a visual impairment all my life, as does my 9yo son, yes it irritates me at times that people can be insensitive to his needs, complicated by living with Autism in all its glory....

It is never acceptable to not put the brain into gear before speaking, maybe that's a discriminatory statement within itself as there are thousands around the world that lack impulse control or sheer common courtesy and respect...we all talk about tolerance and acceptance, unfortunately there is little one can do to change the ignorance of a select few million or billions worldwide - I'm proud of my son, and all he will achieve in his life as he even at this age refuses to allow a couple of obstacles in life determine his character...

I personally will never know how he perceives the able world in his view (he is legally blind and has been since birth) but I know that as it stands, I will not allow him to become part of the minority which this society feels our "disabled" people should be happy with the fact that they are acknowledged as merely existing out of sympathy

Lauren :

20 Feb 2012 5:25:42pm

I'm blind. I don't get offended by the term "turn a blind eye". It upsets me more when people avoid using words like look and see in conversation. I think we need to be careful that we don't turn into the word police in these sorts of discussions. I've often talked with sighted people (or sighties as i call them), who say things like: "I'm not sure how to ask a person with a disability if they need help", or "I'm not sure what I should say to someone who is blind." Is it any wonder? When people ask us for help we get upset and tell them where to go, so they become wary of asking again. We snap at people who use phrases like "visually handicapped". Yes, words can hurt, and we have a responsibility to re-educate (gently) those who misuse them, or don't think before they speak. But this needs to be a two-way thing. If people without disabilities become fearful of what they should and shouldn't say, or avoid talking to people with disabilities for fear of having their heads bitten off, isn't this further isolating people, adding to the "us and them" mentality?

Edgar :

01 Mar 2012 4:48:00pm

Well said Lauren, I couldn't agree more. We can all get so caught up in what we should and shouldn't say that we end up not saying anything, or changing what we say so that it becomes patronising which is even more hurtful. I notice Stella is a comedian, and makes jokes based on her disabilty, and able-bodied people laugh at them. The part of our human nature that laughs at Stella's disabilty jokes is also the part that produces comments such as the ones Hilderbrand made . I know Stella and most of the people commenting here would prefer it if we only laugh at jokes on disabilties when we are given permission to do so by a person with a disabilty, but unfortunately most peoples sense-of-humour doesn't have a PC filter built into it. It seems a little precious for Stella to make the claim it's wrong to laugh at disabilities but is happy to make a career out of actively encouraging able-bodied people to do exactly that.

Stay Connected

What's this Website About?

How Does this Site Work?

This site is where you will find ABC stories, interviews and videos on the subject of disability. As you browse through the site, the links you follow will take you to stories as they appeared in their original context, whether from ABC News, a TV program or a radio interview. Please enjoy.